Mgellis

Project 1242.1/1241.8 'Molniya' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarantul_class_corvette http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarantul_class_corvette#Project_1242.1.2F1241.8_.27Molniya.27 "Project 1242.1 and project 1241.8 Molniya ("Lightning") are further developments of the Tarantul family boats. The two projects has been modified and rearmed with modern missile systems like the Uran-E. The projects are maufactured by the Russian Vympel Shipyard.[1] Russia received at least one boat for trials in the 1990s and in 1999 Vietnam orderd two vessels. Vietnam has also started its own production line of 1241.8 boats with the assistance of Almaz Central Design Bureau in St. Petersburg and has of 2011 four boats in construction.[2][3] In 2009 Libya orderd 3 ships.[4]" --Wikipedia ANW HUD 4 v1.1 b10

500 lb. Moored Mine "The moored mine is the backbone of modern mine systems. They are deployed where water is too deep for bottom mines. They can use several kinds of instruments to detect an enemy, usually a combination of acoustic, magnetic and pressure sensors, or more sophisticated optical shadows or electro potential sensors. These cost many times more than contact mines. Moored mines are effective against most kinds of ships. As they are cheaper than other anti-ship weapons they can be deployed in large numbers, making them useful area denial or "channelizing" weapons. Moored mines usually have lifetimes of more than 10 years, and some almost unlimited. These mines usually weigh 200 kg (440 lb), including 80 kg (175 lb) of explosives (hexatonal). In excess of 150 kg (330 lb) of explosives the mine becomes inefficient, as it becomes too large to handle and the extra explosives add little to the mine's effectiveness." --Wikipedia This is simply a generic mine, cheaper and less sophisticated than a Mk 60 Captor, but still effective against ships. ANW HUD 4 v1.1 b10

ARA Bahía San Blas (B-4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_Bah%C3%ADa_San_Blas_%28B-4%29 "ARA Bahía San Blas is an Amphibious cargo ship of the Argentine Navy, capable of discharging landing craft, troops, vehicles and cargo. Is the first ship to bear the name of the Bay of San Blas in the south of Buenos Aires Province." --Wikipedia ANW HUD 4 v1.1 b10

Export version of the Steregushchy...is it different enough from the Russian version to need its own database entry? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steregushchy_class_corvette http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=74 In 2007 the Indonesian Navy made an agreement in principle (pending a full contract) for four vessels of this type to replace their ageing Dutch-built Fatahillah-class corvettes. The first was to be built in Spain and fitted out in St Petersburg, leaving open the option of Indonesian involvement in building the subsequent ships.[5] This agreement appears to have lapsed; in 2011 Indonesia signed a deal for two Milgem class corvettes from Turkey. Rosoboronexport have briefed Singapore and the UAE on the vessel.[6] The first actual contract for the export version, Project 20382 Tigr, was signed at the 5th International Maritime Defense Show in St. Petersburg in July 2011 when Algeria ordered two ships.[7] The cost was estimated at US$120–150m/ship.[8] --Wikipedia ANW HUD 4 v1.1 b10

Ah, he has already started.

My plan is actually something along these lines...I'm simply going to let people know the HUD-4 is out there, that the scenarios are here at harpgamer, etc. I have already said I have no intention of arguing about databases. Assuming he does not simply decide to ignore me, what poor Herman probably does not realize is that he cannot win this argument because there is no argument. I am simply not going to engage with him. I'm not saying the HUD-4 is better or making any other claim about it (or him) that could be argued or debated; I'm just saying that I personally like the HUD-4, that I think other people will have fun with the HUD-4 and should try it out, and that I hope people will like the scenarios I have written. These things are simply true; they cannot be proven to be "right" or "wrong." At the risk of sounding too zen, I think this is one of those situations where the best way to prove we're right is not to prove we're right. I write scenarios with the HUD-4 because I like the HUD-4. So I'm going to let people know the HUD-4 is out there and that my scenarios are out there. I hope other people will write more scenarios with the HUD-4. If people like the scenarios, they will use the HUD-4. If they don't, no argument I make about whose database is "better" is going to make any difference.

Checking out CombatSim now...

I was curious if anyone had thoughts about how to further promote ANW and the HUD-4 database? For example, does anyone have any recommendations of other sites where we could post our scenarios? I have no objection to posting my own in more than one place if it will increase the number of people who can enjoy them. However, most of the other Harpoon sites I know about do not look like they have been updated very recently. Is there anywhere else the HUD-4 itself should be posted? Thoughts? Ideas? Recommendations?

What a cool site. Thanks for suggesting it. I think I've found most of the Russian ships that need to be suggested for the HUD-4, but I'll check and see if I missed anything.

It does not allways work, but what I've done is this... Russia 1: Neutral to US, friendly to Russia 2 Russia 2 (Rogue): Hostile to US, friendly to Russia 1 US: Neutral to everyone Russia 2 fires on US...when US returns fire, attacking what Russia 1 considers a friendly unit, Russia 1 switches from neutral to hostile. I hope this helps. By the way, I tried the Damascus scenario (after some confusion on figuring out how to use the beta version of 3.11)...I completely screwed it up the first time around, but it looks interesting. (I'm not sure the carrier would only have the two escorts, and I wonder if there should be an airfield in Israel or Greece or someplace that would at least let planes land after the base in Turkey gets blown up, but these are minor points. The airfield can be build as just that...NO ammunition depot, so the planes cannot launch attacks from there.) I'll definitely try it again. Mark

File Name: Pledge 10: The Cardiff Incident (2014) File Submitter: Mgellis File Submitted: 15 Oct 2012 File Category: Scenarios In 2014, a British task force must liberate a trawler seized under questionable circumstances by Ecuador. The captain and crew have been accused of everything from illegal fishing practices to being spies. The Prime Minister is reputed to have said, "When the time comes, we'll go to the International Court, and if I was wrong, I'll accept the consequences. But right now, the law be damned--we're getting our people out of there." Image: The Royal Navy destroyer HMS Dauntless (D 33). U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Donald R. White Jr./Released; 110629-N-MY642-538 Click here to download this file

Thanks, Gunny! Any news on when 3.11 will finally be out?

Have you been able to get it to fire? I tried with a sample scenario...got a Reasoner within 3 miles a Ming, lined up the sub on my port bow (which is what the database says is the right arc), clicked the attack button (and the MK16 was the weapon that the AI auto-selected as the right one to use), and fired...and nothing happened. Later, when I attacked again, it was clear the first ASROC had not fired because I still had six in the mount (one selected to fire and five more available). Is there anything else that might be causing this to happen? Thanks.

Whenever I try to use ASROCs (e.g., RUR-5s) I cannot seem to get them to fire. Other torpedos work fine, but not the ASROCs. I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong (or if they were just a lemon as far as the technology goes and malfunctioned all the time in real life) or if there is a database error, but I figured I should report it. Thanks. Mark ANW HUD 4 v1.1 b10

Komandarm Fedko class oiler http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komandarm_Fedko_class_oiler "The Komandarm Fedko class is a class of replenishment tankers operated by the Indian and Chinese navies. Four ships of the Komandarm Fedko class were constructed by the Soviet Union, later Russia, of which one was bought by India, one by China and two are in commercial service. Jyoti (meaning "light") is the largest ship in the Indian Navy." --Wikipedia ANW HUD 4 v1.1 b10

Deepak class fleet tanker (new class) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_class_fleet_tanker "The Deepak class is a class of fleet replenishment tankers of the Indian Navy built by Fincantieri. Two ships were ordered and the first one joined the fleet on 21 January 2011, while the second joined on 1 October 2011" --Wikipedia This is a new class of tanker used by the Indian Navy. Just to make things easy (?), these ships seem to have the same names and hull numbers as the earlier class, which were tankers, instead of being fleet tankers. ANW HUD 4 v1.1 b10

I'm playing around with scenario ideas and had some questions about one of them. In 1980, the Soviet Union decided to not invade Poland, despite the Solidarity movement's challenges to Soviet power. It seems an invasion was planned, but was postponed... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_reaction_to_the_Polish_crisis_of_1980%E2%80%931981 http://www.columbia.edu/cu/ece/research/intermarium/vol2no1/jaruzels.pdf http://wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/ACFB35.PDF ...but what if the invasion had gone ahead? On December 8, 1980, Soviet, Czech, and East German forces invade Poland. President Carter refuses to use a pre-emptive nuclear strike, and does not believe a counter-invasion of Poland would succeed. But something needs to be done. What might he do? And how would the Soviets have reacted? Here is one possibility...please let me know what you think! WAR PLAN HYDRA This consists primarily of a war on Soviet shipping and on vessels headed for Soviet ports. Quite simply, War Plan Hydra does not and never will put a single NATO trooper or NATO bomb on Soviet soil, but its goal is to wreck havoc on the Soviet economy by denying them trade, crippling their fishing fleet, sinking their navy, etc. The Soviets will be left to cement their control of Poland, but it will be a very expensive victory. It is expected that Soviet naval forces would try to counter NATO attacks, but Carter is gambling that the Soviets will not launch a full scale nuclear war as long as Soviet territory is untouched. He is sending extra troops to Western Europe, though, just to make it clear that he is willing to fight there, too, if he has to. So...what do you think? Is this a plausible war scenario? Any other thoughts, observations, suggestions, etc.? Thanks!

Yes, I use Windows Virtual PC. Easy. Unfortunately, I only have Home Premium, so I can't download the tools for free. And to upgrade to Professional costs about $80. That's more than the whole Harpoon package. I just can't justify it--I'd never use the virtual pc for anything but the HC scenario editor. Fortunately, I can still play HC scenarios other people write (the game runs fine; it's just the scenario editor that does not work). And I can get my scenario writing fix by using H3/ANW. I just wish more people would try ANW--it does take a little getting used to if you've only played HC, but it grows on you. Both versions of the game are great. I've personally come to prefer ANW because it lets me tweak little details in scenarios, especially with the Full Realism and Aircraft Logistics settings. I also like that you can put four or five sides into a scenario--or nine or ten if you want, although there's usually no need to do that--even allies who will help you but who you do not control, or rogue units in an otherwise neutral side who may spark a conflict. Of course, as I said, the disadvantage of this is that you are responsible for making sure all the little details are right. HC has the advantage that it makes certain assumptions, takes care of certain details, etc. The disadvantage here is that it gives you fewer choices, but if those choices were not important to the scenario, it may not matter. In any event, both versions let you create very interesting scenarios. If someone cannot use the HC scenario editor because of something like the 64-bit issue, I would recommend at least checking out ANW and seeing if they like it.

Sirio class patrol vessel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirio_class_patrol_vessel "The Sirius Class 2 or Class Constellations consists of two units operated by the Italian Marina Militare." --Wikipedia ANW HUD 4 v1.1 b10

This was one of the reasons I switched over to ANW. The scenario editor for HC is a 16-bit program that won't run under Windows 7 64-bit. Grrr! I would have to stea--I mean borrow my daughter's laptop (32-bit machine) to write HC scenarios. (And, by the way, when are they going to fix that hole in New Guinea in the Pacific map?) The scenario editor for H3/ANW works fine in Windows 7 64-bit. So if you want to write scenarios, ANW, with Gunny's incredible HUD-4 database, is definitely one way to go. H3/ANW is a bit different than HC, so it takes a little while to learn the scenario editor. You have a LOT of control over how the AI behaves, but that means you have to set up missions for the Red and Green sides. It does not take long to do this once you've done it a few times, though. If you use the "full realism" setting, make sure your submarines start the scenario at periscope level or you cannot give them orders, and once they fully submerge, they are out of contact, and the AI takes over. And if you turn on "aircraft logistics," you can tweak the type and number of loadouts available, which is creates some interesting variables for scenario design. Basically, one difference in H3/ANW is that you have a lot more control over some of the scenario details (at the cost of having to make sure they are set up properly, but this really does not take long and I think it's more than worth the trouble). HC automates a lot of this, so design is easier in some ways, but gives you fewer options (and I think the AI is a bit easier to outsmart in HC, although it is still pretty clever).

Welcome to Harpoon! Be sure to try out Harpoon 3/ANW when you get the chance. Both versions (HC and ANW) are great; there are some differences in gameplay, AI behavior, level of control of units, logistics, etc. that make both versions interesting and fun in their own ways.

Half a dozen sides? Sounds like an interesting scenario. I look forward to seeing it. It can be interesting to play around with postures and different relationships between sides. One trick I discovered, if you want a tense situation that does not turn hot all at once but eventually is to have one side, like the Soviets, mostly neutral, but add a second Soviet side with one or two rogue units who panic, get mad, etc. and fire on you. The two Soviet "sides" are allies, Blue and Blue to each other, so if you return fire, suddenly the rest of the Soviets, previously neutral, may now turn hostile.

Te-1 rocket propelled mine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Te-1_rocket_propelled_mine I imagine a mine like this can be modeled much like the Mk 60 Captor, since it is triggered and then launches itself at its target. Made by China, and apparently exported (as the EM-52) to Iran (and maybe other places, too). ANW HUD 4 v1.1 b10

Sounds good. I look forward to playing the scenarios and reading the AARs. I hope we can get more people involved, too. I wonder if Brad, Tony, or any of the others who have been working on HC scenarios recently would consider writing up H3/ANW versions of them, too? That might stimulate more interest in H3/ANW and the HUD-4 database, especially because people could play both versions, compare the experiences, etc.